review-in-worktree · git:20260911.ad79457 · 2026-09-11 · sha256 edc31b33761f2d5d
review-in-worktree git:20260911.ad79457A
Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/edc31b33761f2d5d.
--- name: review-in-worktree description: | Use this skill when reviewing code isolated in a Git worktree outside a Govard-managed project directory (for example Maestro merge-request review trees under /tmp), when "govard tool" cannot find the project configuration, or when asked to run Govard-managed commands against a detached review tree. compatibility: claude, codex, opencode, copilot, dsh --- # Reviewing in Detached Worktrees ## Why Govard Commands Fail Here `govard tool …` resolves the project from a `.govard.yml` found upward from the current directory and dispatches into that project's running app container. A bare review worktree (created with `git worktree add` for a merge request) carries neither the config nor a running environment, so project-routed Govard commands fail by design. ## Option 1 — Point at the Owning Checkout (preferred, read-only intent) If the branch under review belongs to a Govard project that is already up (`govard up` ran in the real checkout), resolve the environment from there: ```bash GOVARD_PROJECT_DIR=/path/to/real-checkout govard status ``` Verify with `govard status` before anything else. Treat this as read-only context for your review; never run mutations (migrations, cache flushes, indexers) against the owning project's database because a review asked for it. ## Option 2 — Bootstrap a Throwaway Config Only when the review must execute code and no owning environment exists: ```bash govard init # detects the framework, writes .govard.yml in the worktree govard up # brings up an isolated stack named after this directory ``` Clean up afterwards so review trees do not leak containers: ```bash govard down && git worktree remove ../<worktree> ``` ## Option 3 — Static Analysis Only (most MR reviews) Most automated reviews only need the diff, repository history, and the domain skills (`magento2-code-review`, `magento2-linter` guidance). Prefer this when the reviewer has no container rights or the MR is not meant to run. Container-free analysis is available for this case. `govard audit run` no longer needs a container when the check itself does not: ```bash # Works on a bare worktree: no stack, no .govard.yml, no Docker. govard audit run --checks integrity --scope project --format json # A module inside a project, or a detached review tree: govard audit run --checks integrity --mode module_in_project --format json ``` It reports composer manifest/lock problems and Magento module/DI wiring problems (`govard-integrity` findings) and is a different body of evidence from lint — never present it as a substitute for `--checks lint`, which does need Docker. Exit codes: `0` clean, `1` findings, `3` a required capability is missing (`--error-json` prints the versioned envelope). Review the `integrity.json` artifact referenced by the run result for the exact finding list. ## Guardrails - Never point `GOVARD_PROJECT_DIR` at production or shared staging checkouts. - A worktree shares the repository with its main checkout: rebases or `git worktree remove` affect both — coordinate before cleaning up. - Database state is per project, not per worktree: two worktrees of one project share data through the same stack.